You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl> on 2014/12/18 10:22:08 UTC
[4.14] release status update
Hi,
I've just cherry-picked the changes from the release branch into the
develop branch. I've chosen to cherry-pick rather than merge because
of the issues we had with a failed merge earlier this week, which made
the release branch a bit of a mess. I plan to do this more regularly
from now on, in accordance with [1].
Testing so far has been progressing nicely, with a fair number of
issues fixed and most reports being generally positive. Currently I'm
tracking the following issues:
- Fix for ‘no-label’ FlatSpark button (Mahmoud)
- Solution to 'adl/adt' issue with build script (Chris M./Justin)
- Update docs with Java 1.8 "support" (Justin)
- TLF stabilisation (Harbs/Piotr)
- AIR 16 release
The following JIRA issues are open and designated for a fix before 4.14 release:
FLEX-26478 (Mihai Chira)
FLEX-34355 (Alex Harui)
FLEX-34405 (Maurice Amsellem)
FLEX-34581 (OmPrakash Muppirala)
FLEX-34609 (Mihai Chira)
FLEX-34657 (Erik de Bruin)
The 'mobile' runs in Mustella seem to indicate a problem, but we'll
need at least another cycle (~ 24 hrs.) to make sure it isn't a glitch
in the Matrix.
All in all we're making excellent progress. Thanks everyone!
EdB
1: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
Thank you.
I've updated the RELEASE_NOTES and the 'want to fix' JIRA ticket.
EdB
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Mihai Chira <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Both FLEX-26478 and FLEX-34609 are resolved, and now (after making
> sure they're in the 4.14 RC) I marked them as resolved in Jira.
>
> On 18 December 2014 at 09:22, Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've just cherry-picked the changes from the release branch into the
>> develop branch. I've chosen to cherry-pick rather than merge because
>> of the issues we had with a failed merge earlier this week, which made
>> the release branch a bit of a mess. I plan to do this more regularly
>> from now on, in accordance with [1].
>>
>> Testing so far has been progressing nicely, with a fair number of
>> issues fixed and most reports being generally positive. Currently I'm
>> tracking the following issues:
>>
>> - Fix for ‘no-label’ FlatSpark button (Mahmoud)
>> - Solution to 'adl/adt' issue with build script (Chris M./Justin)
>> - Update docs with Java 1.8 "support" (Justin)
>> - TLF stabilisation (Harbs/Piotr)
>> - AIR 16 release
>>
>> The following JIRA issues are open and designated for a fix before 4.14 release:
>>
>> FLEX-26478 (Mihai Chira)
>> FLEX-34355 (Alex Harui)
>> FLEX-34405 (Maurice Amsellem)
>> FLEX-34581 (OmPrakash Muppirala)
>> FLEX-34609 (Mihai Chira)
>> FLEX-34657 (Erik de Bruin)
>>
>> The 'mobile' runs in Mustella seem to indicate a problem, but we'll
>> need at least another cycle (~ 24 hrs.) to make sure it isn't a glitch
>> in the Matrix.
>>
>> All in all we're making excellent progress. Thanks everyone!
>>
>> EdB
>>
>> 1: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ix Multimedia Software
>>
>> Jan Luykenstraat 27
>> 3521 VB Utrecht
>>
>> T. 06-51952295
>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Mihai Chira <mi...@gmail.com>.
Both FLEX-26478 and FLEX-34609 are resolved, and now (after making
sure they're in the 4.14 RC) I marked them as resolved in Jira.
On 18 December 2014 at 09:22, Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just cherry-picked the changes from the release branch into the
> develop branch. I've chosen to cherry-pick rather than merge because
> of the issues we had with a failed merge earlier this week, which made
> the release branch a bit of a mess. I plan to do this more regularly
> from now on, in accordance with [1].
>
> Testing so far has been progressing nicely, with a fair number of
> issues fixed and most reports being generally positive. Currently I'm
> tracking the following issues:
>
> - Fix for ‘no-label’ FlatSpark button (Mahmoud)
> - Solution to 'adl/adt' issue with build script (Chris M./Justin)
> - Update docs with Java 1.8 "support" (Justin)
> - TLF stabilisation (Harbs/Piotr)
> - AIR 16 release
>
> The following JIRA issues are open and designated for a fix before 4.14 release:
>
> FLEX-26478 (Mihai Chira)
> FLEX-34355 (Alex Harui)
> FLEX-34405 (Maurice Amsellem)
> FLEX-34581 (OmPrakash Muppirala)
> FLEX-34609 (Mihai Chira)
> FLEX-34657 (Erik de Bruin)
>
> The 'mobile' runs in Mustella seem to indicate a problem, but we'll
> need at least another cycle (~ 24 hrs.) to make sure it isn't a glitch
> in the Matrix.
>
> All in all we're making excellent progress. Thanks everyone!
>
> EdB
>
> 1: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>
>
>
> --
> Ix Multimedia Software
>
> Jan Luykenstraat 27
> 3521 VB Utrecht
>
> T. 06-51952295
> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
> Separately, are we ready to remove the OSMF and SWFObject prompts from the
> install scripts?
If I understood correctly, Justin has picked that up... Justin?
EdB
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
> +1 for doing it required in the installer.
> Information on Wiki is not enough in my opinion.
I've started a new thread on this subject.
EdB
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by piotrz <pi...@gmail.com>.
+1 for doing it required in the installer.
Information on Wiki is not enough in my opinion.
Piotr
-----
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com
--
View this message in context: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/4-14-release-status-update-tp43705p44292.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
AW: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Krüger,
Olaf <OK...@edscha.com>.
>So, we can make this required, or we should somehow explain during the installation that that license is needed for FlatSpark.
Perhaps we could change the already existing hint:
From:
"The FlatSpark theme uses fonts licensed under the Open Font License. Do you want to install the Font Awesome and Lato Fonts?"
To:
"The FlatSpark components require fonts licensed under the Open Font License. Do you want to install the Font Awesome and Lato Fonts?"
Olaf
________________________________
Edscha Holding GmbH
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Remscheid
Registergericht: Wuppertal, HRB 22889
Geschäftsführung: Francisco J. Riberas Mera, Francisco López Peña, David Vázquez Pascual, Torsten Greiner, Markus Kirchner, Hans-Peter Schulz und Volker Weiss
Vertretungsberechtigt sind nur Geschäftsführer und schriftlich Bevollmächtigte.
Solely Managing Directors or employees with a written proxy have got power of representation.
Der Inhalt dieser E-Mail einschließlich etwaiger beigefügter Dateien ist vertraulich und nur für den Empfänger bestimmt. Sollten Sie nicht der bestimmungsgemäße Empfänger sein, ist Ihnen jegliche Offenlegung, Vervielfältigung, Weitergabe oder Nutzung des Inhalts untersagt. Bitte informieren Sie in diesem Fall unverzüglich den Absender und löschen Sie die E-Mail einschließlich etwaiger beigefügter Dateien von Ihrem System. Vielen Dank.
The contents of this e-mail including any attachments are confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of its contents is strictly prohibited, and you should please notify the sender immediately and then delete this e-mail including any attachments from your system. Thank you.
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com>.
Ok, I just confirmed this.
I installed 2 versions of 4.14, one without checking the "Adobe Embedded
Font Libraries and Utilites" license.
I get that exact error only when I use the version that I didn't accept
that license.
So, we can make this required, or we should somehow explain during the
installation that that license is needed for FlatSpark.
I'll update the wiki with this information.
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com>.
I am installing the sdk again right now to confirm the issue.
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com>.
> Ah! Is this information in the Wiki article? If not, it should be, so
> we can tell people to RTFM ;-)
We just need a confirmation and I'll add it to the wiki.
> If it is needed for FlatSpark why it is optional ? :)
I think we were debating this in another email.
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by piotrz <pi...@gmail.com>.
If it is needed for FlatSpark why it is optional ? :)
Piotr
-----
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com
--
View this message in context: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/4-14-release-status-update-tp43705p44287.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
Ah! Is this information in the Wiki article? If not, it should be, so
we can tell people to RTFM ;-)
EdB
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If I remember correctly we had this problem when we didn't check the fonts
> license during the install. It is optional, but it is needed for FlatSpark.
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 5:20 AM, Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
>
>> I saw it, looks like an isolated problem (single reporter). His
>> problem seems related to a missing or incorrectly linked FlatSpark
>> SWC.
>>
>> We have some time, let's look into it.
>>
>> EdB
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:09 AM, piotrz <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Erik,
>> >
>> > I'm really concerning about this jira
>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34700
>> >
>> > Piotr
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -----
>> > Apache Flex PMC
>> > piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com
>> > --
>> > View this message in context:
>> http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/4-14-release-status-update-tp43705p44281.html
>> > Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ix Multimedia Software
>>
>> Jan Luykenstraat 27
>> 3521 VB Utrecht
>>
>> T. 06-51952295
>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>>
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com>.
If I remember correctly we had this problem when we didn't check the fonts
license during the install. It is optional, but it is needed for FlatSpark.
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 5:20 AM, Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
> I saw it, looks like an isolated problem (single reporter). His
> problem seems related to a missing or incorrectly linked FlatSpark
> SWC.
>
> We have some time, let's look into it.
>
> EdB
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:09 AM, piotrz <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Erik,
> >
> > I'm really concerning about this jira
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34700
> >
> > Piotr
> >
> >
> >
> > -----
> > Apache Flex PMC
> > piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/4-14-release-status-update-tp43705p44281.html
> > Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>
> --
> Ix Multimedia Software
>
> Jan Luykenstraat 27
> 3521 VB Utrecht
>
> T. 06-51952295
> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
I saw it, looks like an isolated problem (single reporter). His
problem seems related to a missing or incorrectly linked FlatSpark
SWC.
We have some time, let's look into it.
EdB
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:09 AM, piotrz <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Erik,
>
> I'm really concerning about this jira
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34700
>
> Piotr
>
>
>
> -----
> Apache Flex PMC
> piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/4-14-release-status-update-tp43705p44281.html
> Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by piotrz <pi...@gmail.com>.
Erik,
I'm really concerning about this jira
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34700
Piotr
-----
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com
--
View this message in context: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/4-14-release-status-update-tp43705p44281.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 12:54 AM, Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
> From Alex in another thread:
>
> "1) whether I broke IOS and Android versions of SpinnerList/DateSpinner."
>
> The Mustella tests seem to indicate all is well. There may be issues
> that will only be visible in the wild, but we won't know unless we put
> the release in the wild. As far as I'm concerned this is no longer a
> blocker.
>
There are no Mustella tests for the new iOS and Android skins. They are
only available for the legacy mobile skins. So, there is a chance that
they are broken even if Mustella reports that everything is fine.
But I do agree that it is not a blocker issue anymore.
Thanks,
Om
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
>From Alex in another thread:
"1) whether I broke IOS and Android versions of SpinnerList/DateSpinner."
The Mustella tests seem to indicate all is well. There may be issues
that will only be visible in the wild, but we won't know unless we put
the release in the wild. As far as I'm concerned this is no longer a
blocker.
"2) whether we want to remove the OFL license option from the Installer"
Yes, we do want this. Justin's arguments make sense, so I second his
proposal to remove it. Will you be able to assist with that?
"3) whether we add text to the Embedded Font option in the installer
that you need to select the Embedded Font libraries if you are going
to try the FlatSpark theme."
Yes, we need text, IMO. I've added my suggestion for en_US to the
config and I'm awaiting the localisations before committing.
So, the way things are going, we're on course for a vote early next week!
EdB
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:08 PM, Justin Mclean
<ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> I thought that was what we agreed upon. Should we take out FontAwesome as
>> well?
>
> I can't see any reason why we need a user to accept the license if we including it in binary form. We only need to prompt for the source in my understanding. If people are really interested it's (now) well documented in the LICENSE/NOTICE files.
>
> Justin
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> I thought that was what we agreed upon. Should we take out FontAwesome as
> well?
I can't see any reason why we need a user to accept the license if we including it in binary form. We only need to prompt for the source in my understanding. If people are really interested it's (now) well documented in the LICENSE/NOTICE files.
Justin
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
I thought that was what we agreed upon. Should we take out FontAwesome as
well?
On 1/14/15, 12:36 PM, "Justin Mclean" <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> Last night I tweaked the installer to take out the OSMF and SWFObject
>> options. Folks should make sure it works as expected.
>
>Can you expand on why you removed OSMF (MPL - category B) but not Font
>Awesome (OFL - also category B) [1] And why is Font Awesome marked
>"Required"?
>
>Thanks,
>Justin
>
>1. http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b
>
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> Last night I tweaked the installer to take out the OSMF and SWFObject
> options. Folks should make sure it works as expected.
Can you expand on why you removed OSMF (MPL - category B) but not Font Awesome (OFL - also category B) [1] And why is Font Awesome marked "Required"?
Thanks,
Justin
1. http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 1/13/15, 11:47 PM, "Erik de Bruin" <er...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
>Alex,
>
>I see you've been working on the mobile Mustella failures. Just so we
>don't cross our beams, what else is on your plate with regard to the
>4.14 release?
If I have time I will look at the DateSpinner failures.
Last night I tweaked the installer to take out the OSMF and SWFObject
options. Folks should make sure it works as expected.
BTW, I was totally wrong on my guess about BI. I was looking at the skin
in the Spark SWC but the tests use the one in the MobileTheme.SWC. The
skin in the Spark SWC may not be right but I don’t know how to tell.
-Alex
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
Alex,
I see you've been working on the mobile Mustella failures. Just so we
don't cross our beams, what else is on your plate with regard to the
4.14 release?
Thanks,
EdB
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 5:23 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala
<bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 10, 2015 1:34 PM, "Alex Harui" <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/8/15, 1:00 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >The intention is to keep the graphics just the same, but move the display
>> >logic to the new skin. Obviously something weren't wrong with the move,
>> >just wrong enough to break the tests.
>> >
>>
>> I remember you asking about skin sizing. I took a quick look at the
>> BusyIndicator. The 4.13 code sets up non-square dimensions. The
>> measuredWidth and measuredHeight are not the same, and that may affect the
>> chosen diameter. 4.14 has pre-chosen the diameter which drives the
>> measurements. Is there a reason for that?
>
> No, that was not intentional. I thought I was doing it the same as 4.13.
> If not, that is a bug.
>
> Thanks,
> Om
>
>>
>> -Alex
>>
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>.
On Jan 10, 2015 1:34 PM, "Alex Harui" <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/8/15, 1:00 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >The intention is to keep the graphics just the same, but move the display
> >logic to the new skin. Obviously something weren't wrong with the move,
> >just wrong enough to break the tests.
> >
>
> I remember you asking about skin sizing. I took a quick look at the
> BusyIndicator. The 4.13 code sets up non-square dimensions. The
> measuredWidth and measuredHeight are not the same, and that may affect the
> chosen diameter. 4.14 has pre-chosen the diameter which drives the
> measurements. Is there a reason for that?
No, that was not intentional. I thought I was doing it the same as 4.13.
If not, that is a bug.
Thanks,
Om
>
> -Alex
>
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 1/8/15, 1:00 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>The intention is to keep the graphics just the same, but move the display
>logic to the new skin. Obviously something weren't wrong with the move,
>just wrong enough to break the tests.
>
I remember you asking about skin sizing. I took a quick look at the
BusyIndicator. The 4.13 code sets up non-square dimensions. The
measuredWidth and measuredHeight are not the same, and that may affect the
chosen diameter. 4.14 has pre-chosen the diameter which drives the
measurements. Is there a reason for that?
-Alex
RE: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Kessler CTR Mark J <ma...@usmc.mil>.
Still not worse than my 2px padding change to the checkbox skin, think we has had hundreds bad images or something ridiculous. :P
-Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: omuppi1@gmail.com [mailto:omuppi1@gmail.com] On Behalf Of OmPrakash Muppirala
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 4:01 AM
To: dev@flex.apache.org
Subject: Re: [4.14] release status update
On Jan 7, 2015 7:56 AM, "Alex Harui" <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/7/15, 7:17 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <er...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
>
> >
> > - a whole bunch of mobile tests fail
>
> I looked into this last night. I think there may be several issues, but I
> think most failures are caused by a slight change to the graphics for the
> BusyIndicator used in the test.
The graphics part is the the same exact code.
IOW, most ActionBar tests are failing
> because a BusyIndicator is used in the test. The BI is mostly occluded by
> the AB, but a bit shows through.
Yes, that is what I guessed too.
I think it has to do with the show/hide, rotate/don't-rotate logic in the
BusyIndicator skin.
>
> Om said he might be checking email, but until he does, does anybody else
> know if the graphics change is intentional? It might also be a behavior
> change, that the BI was supposed to hide or is rotating when it didn’t
> used to or vice-versa.
The intention is to keep the graphics just the same, but move the display
logic to the new skin. Obviously something weren't wrong with the move,
just wrong enough to break the tests.
>
> Clearing that up might resolve all or most of the failures and then we can
> examine what remains.
>
>
> Separately, are we ready to remove the OSMF and SWFObject prompts from the
> install scripts?
>
> -Alex
>
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>.
On Jan 7, 2015 7:56 AM, "Alex Harui" <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/7/15, 7:17 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <er...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
>
> >
> > - a whole bunch of mobile tests fail
>
> I looked into this last night. I think there may be several issues, but I
> think most failures are caused by a slight change to the graphics for the
> BusyIndicator used in the test.
The graphics part is the the same exact code.
IOW, most ActionBar tests are failing
> because a BusyIndicator is used in the test. The BI is mostly occluded by
> the AB, but a bit shows through.
Yes, that is what I guessed too.
I think it has to do with the show/hide, rotate/don't-rotate logic in the
BusyIndicator skin.
>
> Om said he might be checking email, but until he does, does anybody else
> know if the graphics change is intentional? It might also be a behavior
> change, that the BI was supposed to hide or is rotating when it didn’t
> used to or vice-versa.
The intention is to keep the graphics just the same, but move the display
logic to the new skin. Obviously something weren't wrong with the move,
just wrong enough to break the tests.
>
> Clearing that up might resolve all or most of the failures and then we can
> examine what remains.
>
>
> Separately, are we ready to remove the OSMF and SWFObject prompts from the
> install scripts?
>
> -Alex
>
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 1/7/15, 7:17 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <er...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
>
> - a whole bunch of mobile tests fail
I looked into this last night. I think there may be several issues, but I
think most failures are caused by a slight change to the graphics for the
BusyIndicator used in the test. IOW, most ActionBar tests are failing
because a BusyIndicator is used in the test. The BI is mostly occluded by
the AB, but a bit shows through.
Om said he might be checking email, but until he does, does anybody else
know if the graphics change is intentional? It might also be a behavior
change, that the BI was supposed to hide or is rotating when it didn’t
used to or vice-versa.
Clearing that up might resolve all or most of the failures and then we can
examine what remains.
Separately, are we ready to remove the OSMF and SWFObject prompts from the
install scripts?
-Alex
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
OK, we're getting closer:
- still hoping for an AIR 16 release
- Justin needs a bit more time for the final fixes for the 'legal' issues
- we have two sets of Mustella failures to worry about:
- FXG tests fail with FP/AIR 16
- a whole bunch of mobile tests fail
I'm sure the first two will resolve soon (if AIR is not released,
we'll still go ahead with the vote, it's not a blocker); I am worried
about the Mustella stuff. Alex provided steps to fix the minor issues
with FXG, which I hope to apply soon... But the mobile failures are
too complex for someone not familiar with recent changes to easily
solve. And since Om is unavailable for another couple of weeks...
I am tempted to release with the mobile tests failing, but I won't :-(
The failures are too severe and will affect a lot of users, I'm
afraid. Thoughts?
EdB
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The release is progressing nicely.
>
> I've just 'closed' the release branch for regular fixes. We're now in
> full stabilization mode, trying to fix the failing Mustella tests, and
> resolve the licensing issues. I've addressed the status and progress
> of these issues in their respective threads.
>
> Testing so far has been progressing nicely, with a fair number of
> issues fixed and most reports being generally positive. Currently I'm
> tracking the following issues:
>
> - Saxon related licensing in binary release artefacts
> - Mustella failures in 'main' and 'mobile' suites
> - AIR 16 release
>
> That last two issues I consider 'nice to have', but non-blocking: the
> 'mobile' runs in Mustella are a problem, as well as the FXG related
> failures in the 'main' runs. Most of these, however, seem to be
> 'sub-pixel' issues. If no one can spare the cycles to properly address
> these in the next week or so, I'll progress with the release with
> these failures marked as 'Known Issues' and let the hawk-eyed
> developers affected by these file appropriate JIRA issues with real
> word examples.
>
> I'm currently looking to create the release artefacts in the first
> half of January. Thanks everyone!
>
> EdB
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 11:09 AM, Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Fixed two more issues: FLEX-34693 and FLEX-34695
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> OK, you should be able to assign issues to yourself now.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you Alex.
>>>
>>> I already resolved FLEX-34694 and FLEX-34692, both were reported by Olaf
>>> and were related to FlatSpark.
>>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ix Multimedia Software
>
> Jan Luykenstraat 27
> 3521 VB Utrecht
>
> T. 06-51952295
> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
Hi,
The release is progressing nicely.
I've just 'closed' the release branch for regular fixes. We're now in
full stabilization mode, trying to fix the failing Mustella tests, and
resolve the licensing issues. I've addressed the status and progress
of these issues in their respective threads.
Testing so far has been progressing nicely, with a fair number of
issues fixed and most reports being generally positive. Currently I'm
tracking the following issues:
- Saxon related licensing in binary release artefacts
- Mustella failures in 'main' and 'mobile' suites
- AIR 16 release
That last two issues I consider 'nice to have', but non-blocking: the
'mobile' runs in Mustella are a problem, as well as the FXG related
failures in the 'main' runs. Most of these, however, seem to be
'sub-pixel' issues. If no one can spare the cycles to properly address
these in the next week or so, I'll progress with the release with
these failures marked as 'Known Issues' and let the hawk-eyed
developers affected by these file appropriate JIRA issues with real
word examples.
I'm currently looking to create the release artefacts in the first
half of January. Thanks everyone!
EdB
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 11:09 AM, Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fixed two more issues: FLEX-34693 and FLEX-34695
>
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> OK, you should be able to assign issues to yourself now.
>>>
>>
>> Thank you Alex.
>>
>> I already resolved FLEX-34694 and FLEX-34692, both were reported by Olaf
>> and were related to FlatSpark.
>>
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com>.
Fixed two more issues: FLEX-34693 and FLEX-34695
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> OK, you should be able to assign issues to yourself now.
>>
>
> Thank you Alex.
>
> I already resolved FLEX-34694 and FLEX-34692, both were reported by Olaf
> and were related to FlatSpark.
>
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com>.
>
> OK, you should be able to assign issues to yourself now.
>
Thank you Alex.
I already resolved FLEX-34694 and FLEX-34692, both were reported by Olaf
and were related to FlatSpark.
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
OK, you should be able to assign issues to yourself now.
On 12/18/14, 2:05 AM, "Mahmoud Ali Neto" <mu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I have a JIRA account created (akamud), I can't assign issues to me. but
>I'm already resolving FLEX-34692 and FLEX-34682.
Re: [4.14] release status update
Posted by Mahmoud Ali <mu...@gmail.com>.
I have a JIRA account created (akamud), I can't assign issues to me. but
I'm already resolving FLEX-34692 and FLEX-34682.